alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 35 (Thursday, February 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 7992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2928]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than March 16, 2007.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Tracy Basinger, Director, 
Regional and Community Bank Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105-1579:
    1. Fairfield Financial Holdings Corp, Fairfield, Washington; to 
become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting 
shares of Bank of Fairfield, Fairfield, Washington.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 15, 
2007.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7-2928 Filed 2-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2023 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2023-11	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000 &K000000VII VDR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"September 2023
No. 50015.

#### Petitions 6422-R, etc., of American Express Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It appeared that the petitioner had filed appeals for reappraisement which were abandoned for the reason that the -importer • was unable to obtain any information from Germany. At the trial in this case the president of the importing corporation testified that he was familiar with-the importations in question; that he has been importing umbrella silk from Germany and other countries for the past 25 or 30 years; that he had never had' his values questioned or advanced prior to this instance; and that he had furnished to the appraiser, as well as the Treasury agent who called at his place of business, all *the*information *in his*possession. Prom the record the court was satisfied that the entry at less value than that found on final appraisement was without any intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts or to deceive the appraiser as to the true value of the merchandise. The pet i I ions were therefore granted.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

# AGENCY:

Department of Energy. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed subsequent arrangement. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice is being issued under the authority of section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160). The Department is providing notice of a proposed “subsequent arrangement” under the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and Canada. 

                        This subsequent arrangement concerns the retransfer of 846,126 kg of Natural UO3                         (82.7% U), containing 700,000 kg of Uranium. This material will be retransferred from Cameco Corporation, Canada, to Springfields Fuels Ltd., United Kingdom for ultimate use as nuclear power reactor fuel by Electric Power Development Company Ltd., Japan. Springfields Fuels Ltd. is authorized to receive nuclear material pursuant to the U.S.-Euratom Agreement for Cooperation.                     

In accordance with section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement will not be inimical to the common defense and security. 

This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than fifteen days after the date of publication of this notice. 

Dated: February 20, 2007.

For the Department of Energy. 

Anatoli Welihozkiy, 

Acting Director, Office of International Regimes and Agreements.

 [FR Doc. E7-3180 Filed 2-23-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  120,274
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,876
<INVENTORY>                                    161,208
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               289,788
<PP&E>                                         101,673
<DEPRECIATION>                                  39,786
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 464,969
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           76,409
<BONDS>                                        353,246
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,433
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   464,969
<SALES>                                        357,015
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               357,015
<CGS>                                          250,621
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  250,621
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,271<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (2,170)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,710
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,432)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,637
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,458)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,458)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Product development expenses.
<F2>The Company's shares are not publicly traded.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 9 , 2021

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 20

- 00005

- CR

JASON DEWAYNE HEARD , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 21st District Court Washington County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 18,419

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Jason Dewayne Heard appeals his conviction for failure to comply with the sex offender registration requirements. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 61.102. Appellant’s appoin ted counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the
record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).2 A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of his right to inspect the appellate record and file a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the
record . We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Ble dsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Jewell and Poissant.

Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
(Reap. Dec. 10987)

#### United States *v.*S. Jackson & Son, McCandless, Inc. (American Mercantile Co.)

Entry No. 2340.

(Decided May 20, 1965)

*John*TV. *Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General *(Mollie Strum*of counsel) for tbe plaintiff.

Defendant not represented by counsel.

Wilson, Judge:

This is a collector’s appeal for reappraisement involving a shipment of certain canned crabmeat, exported from Taiwan on June 23,1963, and entered at the port of New Orleans.

At the trial, the examiner of the involved merchandise testified as follows:

> Q. Will you please advise us of tbe facts wbicb bave resulted in tbe Collector’s appeal, and tbe facts of wbicb you bave personal knowledge relating to this *674importation ? — A. I will. This appeal is limited to the appraised value of the fourth item listed on invoice numbered 18, which is described as “Canned King Crabmeat 48/7-% oz. Raney Labelled ‘Wolferman’ brand, 75 cartons.” In making my return of appraisement, I obtained my values from a master list, and in copying the values in red ink on the invoice, I inadvertently showed a value of $18.88 per carton for the item in question. Changing the unit value of the item in question was in fact a clerical error on my part, as it was my intention to accept the invoice value. The involved merchandise was imported after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, and is not identified on the final list published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to said Act, T.D. 54521.

> On or about the dates of exportation of the involved merchandise, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States were the invoice unit values, net packed, $28.15 U.S. currency.

> I have communicated with the importer, and they have agreed to these facts.

> Judge Wilson : What was the correct value, the entered value?

> The Witness : That is correct.

On the agreed facts, I find export value, as that value is defined hi section 402 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved and that such value was the invoice unit value, net packed, $28.15 United States currency.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2024 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2023-11	&"Arial,Bold"VII CER - &P	&"Arial,Bold"September 2023
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ANDERSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0583 MCE DAD P

vs.

DOCTOR EXUM,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Pursuant to the court’s February 2,

2005 scheduling order, the case is set for pretrial conference on December 23, 2005, and jury trial

on March 15, 2006. Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment cannot be resolved

prior to the date set for pretrial conference. Good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Pretrial conference set for December 23, 2005, is vacated, along with the dates

set for the filing of pretrial statements and motions to obtain attendance of witnesses at trial; and

2. Jury trial set for March 15, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. before the Honorable Morrison

C. England Jr. is vacated. Dates will be re-set at a later time, if appropriate.

DATED: November 22, 2005.

DAD:13

ande0583.vac

Case 2:04-cv-00583-MCE -DAD Document 30 Filed 11/22/05 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 4.5

SUMMARY OF COMPUTER SERVICES OUTSOURCING AGREEMENT

     Pursuant to an agreement dated December 23, 2003 between us and NESS A.T.
Ltd. ("NESS"), NESS has undertaken to provide us with IT Outsourcing services,
including ongoing management and operation of our Information Systems,
maintenance and operation of hardware, computers, peripheral equipment,
communications and software infrastructure (i.e. Databases, Operations Systems,
etc.), application operation and maintenance, modification and adaptation of our
applications, information security services etc.

     The agreement is for an initial period of three years beginning from
January 1, 2004 and we recently extended it for an additional two years. We are
entitled to terminate the agreement by a prior notice of a few months. In 2005,
the cost of the service was NIS 3.3 million and in 2006 it will amount to NIS
2.4 million. In 2007 and 2008 the cost of the service for each year will amount
to NIS 2.3 million. The above amounts are linked such that half of the payments
are linked to the Israeli cost-of-living index and half to exchange rate of the
U.S. Dollar.

     During the term of the agreement, we are entitled to order from NESS
modifications to our information systems and/or development of new applications
and for such purpose, we have available to us a "bank of hours".
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARREL L. SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0702 MCE PAN P

vs.

KING, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner without counsel seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. He claims defendant King was deliberately indifferent to his safety by making a false

report stating that plaintiff was a threat to prison security based upon confidential information

and informing plaintiff’s cell-mate about it, thereby placing plaintiff at an unacceptable risk of

future attack by his cell-mate’s friends. On March 16, 2006, defendant King filed an application

for leave to file under seal a document upon which he relies in his motion for summary judgment

filed March 17, 2006. Defendant asserts that giving the document to plaintiff will create an

unacceptable risk plaintiff will circulate it among other prisoners, which could result in serious

bodily injury to or death of another prisoner.

The document defendant contends should not publicly be disclosed is defendant’s

Exhibit 2 to defendant’s motion for summary judgment. It contains information about a

Case 2:04-cv-00702-MCE -EFB Document 101 Filed 04/28/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

prisoner’s report to defendant King alleging plaintiff Smith threatened that prisoner. Defendant

King asserts the document is relevant to show there is no genuine issue about a material fact, i.e.,

whether defendant King falsified a report that resulted in plaintiff’s placement in Administrative

Segregation. 

The court has reviewed the document that defendant King intends to rely upon as

Exhibit 2 to his motion for summary judgment.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s March 16, 2006, application for leave to file a document under

seal is granted;

2. Within 20 days from the date this order is signed, defendant shall give plaintiff

an opportunity to review the document under strictly confidential circumstances and to take notes

on the contents of the document;

3. Defendant shall thereafter retain the document;

4. Plaintiff shall not in any manner, written or spoken, communicate the contents

of the document;

5. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date he reviews the document to file and serve

an opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

DATED: April 27, 2006.

\004

\smit0702.ord to seal

Case 2:04-cv-00702-MCE -EFB Document 101 Filed 04/28/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE>
                                       EXHIBIT 11
                                  IONICS, INCORPORATED

                           COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON
                               AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE
                                                       
<CAPTION>
                                                      YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31          

                                                1996            1995            1994   
<S>                                          <C>             <C>             <C>
Net Income                                   $26,503,000     $21,025,000     $15,448,000  

Calculation of primary earnings per
common and common equivalent share:

Weighted average common shares outstanding    15,542,000      14,545,000      13,926,000  

Increase from assumed exercise of 
stock options and investment of pro-
ceeds in treasury stock, based upon
average market prices                            564,000         540,000         272,000  

Weighted average number of common and 
common equivalent shares outstanding          16,106,000      15,085,000      14,198,000

Earnings per common and common
equivalent share                                   $1.65           $1.39           $1.09

Calculation of fully diluted earnings per
common and common equivalent share: 

Weighted average common and common equivalent
shares outstanding used in calculation
of primary earnings per common and
common equivalent share                       16,106,000      15,085,000      14,198,000

Increase from assumed exercise of stock
options and investment of proceeds in
treasury stock, based upon year-end
market price                                      19,000          67,000          42,000

Weighted average number of common and
common equivalent shares used to calculate
fully diluted earnings per common and 
common equivalent share                       16,125,000      15,152,000      14,240,000

Earnings per common and common
equivalent share assuming full dilution            $1.64           $1.39          $1.08


</TABLE>




59
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-2 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 3

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 52 Att. 1

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-2 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-2 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBBINS MOTOR : CIVIL ACTION

TRANSPORTATION, INC. :

Plaintiff, :

 :

vs. :

 :

TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT CO. :

ta TRISM, dba TRISM SPECIAL :

SERVICES :

Defendant. : NO. 02-4446

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 31st day of July, 2002, upon consideration of the Suggestions of

Bankruptcy of defendant, Tri-State Motor Transit Company (Document No. 4, filed July 29,

2002), the Court noting from the Suggestions of Bankruptcy that defendant, Tri-State Motor

Transit Company, filed a Voluntary Petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri on December 18, 2001, and

that, pursuant to § 362 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, all proceedings against defendant,

Tri-State Motor Transit Company, are automatically stayed, and good cause appearing, IT IS

ORDERED as follows:

1. All proceedings in this matter are STAYED until further order of the Court;

2. The case shall be TRANSFERRED to the CIVIL SUSPENSE FILE by the Clerk of

Court;

3. The Clerk of Court shall MARK the case CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL

PURPOSES; and,

4. The Court shall retain jurisdiction and the case shall be returned to the trial docket

when it is in such status as it may proceed to final disposition.

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 5 Filed 08/01/2002 Page 1 of 2
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the entry of this Order is WITHOUT PREJUDICE

to the rights of the parties.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties, through counsel, shall file and serve joint

status reports at four (4) month intervals or more frequently if warranted by the circumstances. 

One (1) copy of each status report shall be served on the Court (Chambers, Room 12613) when

the original is filed.

BY THE COURT:

 

 JAN E. DUBOIS, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 5 Filed 08/01/2002 Page 2 of 2